Spies In Denial: GCHQ Boss Says Snowden Didn't Kick Off Debate Over Surveillance

from the you-look-foolish dept

For all the idiotic things said about Ed Snowden, at least US bureaucrats appear to have come around to the idea that he helped kick off a necessary debate on surveillance powers and privacy. Just recently we had former Attorney General Eric Holder admit that Snowden "performed a public service by raising the debate." And regular surveillance apologist and former Defense Department lawyer Jack Goldsmith just said that "Snowden forced the intelligence community out of its suboptimal and unsustainable obsession with secrecy."

It appears that some of their counterparts in the UK are still in denial about all of this. GCHQ's boss Robert Hannigan, whose currently on a PR charm offensive (or should that be just offensive PR?) insists that Snowden has nothing to do with the ongoing debate, which he says was happening prior to Snowden leaking documents:
No, Edward Snowden had not sparked a global debate about privacy - that had been under way already - but terrorist targets GCHQ had been tracking had learned from his revelations with heavens knows what consequences, he said.
This is delusional, and calls into question whether or not the GCHQ has management that lives in reality or in a fantasy land. As someone who has followed this issue since well before the Snowden leaks, to argue that the debate was happening in any real way prior to them being splashed across the press is a flat out lie. You can disagree with what Snowden did -- as Hannigan clearly does. But to argue that the revelations did not spark the debate is clearly wrong.

As for the latter part of Hannigan's claim, that terrorists learned stuff from the Snowden documents that created "heaven knows what consequences," that's a load of bunk also. Actual studies showed basically no change in behavior by terrorists post-Snowden, as many already assumed that their basic communications were being tracked. And no one has yet to demonstrate any legitimate consequences from his revelations other than forcing people like Hannigan to have to answer questions about why the GCHQ and NSA seem to be spying on tons of people.

If this new PR campaign is about rebuilding trust in the GCHQ, Hannigan might want to recognize that spewing pure bullshit doesn't make people trust him more. It makes them trust him a lot less.

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • icon
    Vidiot (profile), 9 Jun 2016 @ 6:17am

    "... had learned from his revelations with heavens knows what consequences..."

    In addition to denying reality, Hanningan's not so hot with the idioms, either, pluralizing "heaven". Unless GCHQ's extensive surveillance extends into the otherworldly, and they've documented a plurality of heavens.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 9 Jun 2016 @ 6:46am

      Re:

      Well I'm sure he logically feels any heaven he is accepted into would be free of people he deems terrorists. Since a percentage of people labelled as terrorists and killed as such are actually innocent and will be going to heaven he must conclude that there have to be multiple heavens. Concluding that he himself is more of a terrorist to the majority of the world and wouldn't qualify for heaven could never even enter his group think mind.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      SteveMB (profile), 9 Jun 2016 @ 7:40am

      Re:

      In addition to denying reality, Hanningan's not so hot with the idioms, either, pluralizing "heaven". Unless GCHQ's extensive surveillance extends into the otherworldly, and they've documented a plurality of heavens.

      Maybe he would have gotten it right if he's stuck to a metaphor from his own side of the aisle ("...with the devil knows what consequences...")

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Aaron Walkhouse (profile), 9 Jun 2016 @ 8:13pm

      The bible actually mentions multiple heavens…

      …and since the bible has informed british culture for about
      four centuries you can expect common phrases and wording
      to reflect that influence.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    David, 9 Jun 2016 @ 6:45am

    Qualified for his job.

    This is delusional, and calls into question whether or not the GCHQ has management that lives in reality or in a fantasy land.

    Well, they are tasked with staying one step ahead of terrorists.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Call me Al, 9 Jun 2016 @ 6:50am

    Heaven knows

    or perhaps he is being careful with his wording. We read heaven knows and assume he means that the consequences are vast and meaningful. Alternatively he could simply mean "there might be consequences, there might not be consequcnes... who knows".

    I suspect he will vary his answer if asked for clarification depending on who is asking and whether the answer will be documented.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 9 Jun 2016 @ 6:52am

    this is not just about denial on the part of Robert Hannigan, it's typical of how the UK government in it's entirety looks at things!what it has done is allow the UK government to become the worst nation on the planet as far as freedom, privacy and democracy is concerned, with nothing being more important now than total surveillance on every single person in the UK, every second of every day! how the fuck is any supposed to feel safe there? it will have so much information, by the time it has been sorted into the two relevant piles, one to do with terrorism and one to do with copyright infringement, those responsible will be long gone!!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 9 Jun 2016 @ 7:17am

    Close, but...

    No, Edward Snowden had not sparked a global debate about privacy
    Well he's sort of right, in that aware people in the UK knew privacy was being screwed long before Snowdon and attempted to debate it... but the UK Government response has always been similar to the rest of his tirade - i.e. sticking his fingers in his ears and going "La, la la la la! I'm not listening!"

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 9 Jun 2016 @ 7:52am

    Of course there was already a debate

    And the spies knew that was happening because that's what they were spending most of their time spying on.

    Everyone pretty much assumed they were doing terrible and nefarious things, but it wasn't until Snowden proved it that shit really hit the fan.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 9 Jun 2016 @ 8:04am

    True transparency

    When Hanningan gets to St. Peters gate he may learn the real meaning of transparency, there won't be any secret classification on judgement day.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 9 Jun 2016 @ 8:07am

    Look... over there... see all the birds? Ah never mind about the man behind the curtain, he doesn't exist.

    Problem is while the public thought it was likely the GCHQ and the NSA were doing these things, they were hidden behind secrecy and no one had any proof beyond speculation. Once the Snowden documents started surfacing, it was no longer guess work but there was the proof.

    Sure none of the spy agencies want to own up to Snowden making a difference but recall that the GCHQ was so concerned about the data they showed up and demanded the hard drives containing the Snowden documents be destroyed. Even though they knew it would not get rid of them.

    The Snoopers Charter would not even have been considered had the activities of the GCHQ continued to have been hid. Politicians rushing to give the agency what it wants, despite the outcries of it's citizens is another sure sign of what the Snowden documents did in exposure. They now have to make it legal or end certain practices.

    So while they may deny the discussion taking place and having real life effects, they can't deny the scrambling to make it all legal after the fact.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    I.T. Guy, 9 Jun 2016 @ 8:24am

    The truth lies in his own statement:
    "with heavens knows what consequences"

    Seems the head of a spy agency SHOULD know what consequences if any had occurred no? Seems a little irresponsible to let it lie in heavens hands no? Pure bullshit. Plain and simple. I know it... you know it... and he even knows it.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 9 Jun 2016 @ 12:12pm

      Re:

      Seems the head of a spy agency SHOULD know what consequences if any had occurred no? Seems a little irresponsible to let it lie in heavens hands no?
      "HEAVENS" is probably their satellite-based terrorist monitoring program.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 9 Jun 2016 @ 8:30am

    Not to mention that their idea of "debate" has always been "we need more surveillance powers", even post-Snowden.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 9 Jun 2016 @ 9:29am

    Well he's *technically* true. Many of us were debating and warning about this very thing for YEARS if not decades but nobody listened to us .... and besides, why would they? Elected officials only care about looking "in charge of things" so they can get re-elected. Common sense has nothing to do with that.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 9 Jun 2016 @ 10:55am

    The Big Lie

    Joseph Goebbels took inspiration from the English in an article published 12 January 1941:

    "The essential English leadership secret does not depend on particular intelligence. Rather, it depends on a remarkably stupid thick-headedness. The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous."

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Peter (profile), 9 Jun 2016 @ 11:10am

    "terrorist targets GCHQ had been tracking had learned from his revelations with heavens knows what consequences, he said."

    "terrorist targets GCHQ had been tracking had learned from his revelations with heavens knows what consequences, he said."

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Peter (profile), 9 Jun 2016 @ 11:16am

    "terrorist targets GCHQ had been tracking had learned from his revelations with heavens knows what consequences, he said."

    Not just heavens, everybody knows the answer: there have been no terror attacks in the UK since the documents since the public was informed about some of GCHQ's more questionable activities.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 9 Jun 2016 @ 2:47pm

    prediction

    "with heavens knows what consequences"
    Terror attack within the next months
    attackers will be known to Gov agencies
    attackers will have had contact with Gov agencies
    attack will happen during a training exercise and do exactly what the exercise was about.

    60+% of past attacks matched those parameters.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
Special Affiliate Offer

Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.